Official statement from Valve.
We shared with the NYAG that these types of boxes in our games are widely used, not just in video games but in the tangible world as well, where generations have grown up opening baseball card packs and blind boxes and bags, and then trading and selling the items they receive.
You’re right! We should stop that too!
I don’t get why these target valve and how they are a scourge if it’s purely cosmetic. Only complaint I could see is possibly for tf2, though that never seemed pay to win like.
I’d highly recommend you check out People Make Games’ videos on Counter-Strike gambling, which include testimonials from child gambling addicts. And if you still need more convincing, there’s also some videos by Coffeezilla.
But I’d also like to see more companies held accountable for this than just Valve.
Did end up watching it (I’ve always enjoyed PMG vids and Quinns). In a way I see it, I just don’t quite fully understand why the onus is on Valve. If valve was directly running the gambling sites, that would be one thing. I would give them flack for accepting sponsorships for dota with some of them. Though it’s a similar vein to sport kings advertisements on shows and such.
Even before you get to the reseller sites that Valve is definitely aware of, benefiting from, and doing nothing to stop, the way the system is intended to work is still using all of the tricks out of the slot machine playbook.
This is true, but most things digital do the same thing if I remember correctly. I think rocket league with free loot boxes does that.
How exactly are the children buying the loot boxes in the first place? Me thinks the parents play a role in this…
You can buy gift cards for Steam from the drug store or Walmart with cash, and there are many non-gambling ways to spend money on Steam.
And the kids are getting the cash from?
Far more sources than just a credit card. You can sell something from home during lunch period to another student for enough money to buy a Steam gift card, and their parents would never know.
And again, the parents should be monitoring what their kids do online. They can totally spot it if they cared enough.
I see what you’re saying, but I still don’t see how this gives any merit to the lawsuit, as I’m especially dubious about the multiple lawsuits on valve in a short timeframe. Note how one of the points that the lawsuit is making is that Valve doesn’t verify user’s age, so that is why they’re being sued; for letting children gamble.
It’s a blatant move made by wealthy CEOs who have dirt to either hit valve in one of its more profitable money making centers, or fall in line with demanding PII from customers for a surveillance state.
Just to go back to the gymnastics you’ve set up, I’d also like to point out that I’ve seen kids get their hands on plenty of things they aren’t “supposed” to, like cigarettes, other nicotine products, drugs, and many more. While it isn’t great that safeguards aren’t in place for children, that isn’t exactly a great trade-off for turning into fucking North Korea.
There are solutions for these problems; Better paid, less overworked parents would have more time and mental bandwidth to be involved with their children and be better parents. More strict government regulation (that doesn’t involve dissolving personal freedoms even further than they already have) regarding dangerous practices for its citizens.
And just to get ahead of any insistence that this lawsuit is a good idea, let me give you some examples of what could be done besides giving PII:
Final note here, but if someone is determined to do something, it’s going to be very hard to stop them if they’re not under supervision; think of various high profile murders that occur in the US regularly. Hell, think of all the school shootings! A kid isn’t able to legally own or buy a firearm, hell purchasing a firearm is about the most strict customer filtering you can get outside of more specialized goods, and kids still get their hands on them all the time, so clearly putting the onus on a business to filter it’s customers when it can’t even see them is going to be much more difficult to enforce.
I do think parents have plenty of responsibility here. I don’t think that absolves Valve. We put regulations on who can legally gamble because we know it’s addicting, and I think it’s a problem how little Valve have done to prevent it from being done by those who aren’t legally supposed to. I’m not advocating for government intrusion to collect more PII, nor am I convinced necessarily that that’s what NY state is asking for, but it’s certainly what Valve would like you to believe they’re fighting against. I would love to see things legally categorized as gambling that currently are not, and the space that Valve is operating in may be less of a gray area than their competitors operate in due to the resale market.
Biggest argument: it’s bad to get children addicted to gambling.
Secondary argument: if you buy a game, you shouldn’t have to gamble to get the game’s content.
This one doesn’t apply to Valve’s games, both because the base games are free and because the items can be bought directly. The rest of the gaming industry on the other hand…
Bought from valve directly? Because I don’t think saying you can buy the skin from the Steam marketplace for $1,000 is the slam dunk argument you think it is.
Technically, yes, bought from them directly, but I’m not sure how that distinction matters one way or another.
Either way, you either spend about $1000 on lootboxes, gambling to get it, or you buy it from another player for about that much. Given that the value is player set based on supply and demand, the price will be in the same ballpark either way. You can argue that the price is absurd and abusive, but thats an argument against high prices on worthless digital items, not one against lootboxes.
Yes, there’s a huge difference between selling something with transparent pricing versus offering it as a gambling prize.
The issue is not the price, it’s the addictive gambling mechanic. It’s not about making sure steam doesn’t rip people off, it’s about making sure steam doesn’t get kids addicted to gambling.
Yes, exactly my point. Whether you paid previously, and whether its available without gambling has no impact on the definition of gambling or if it is bad.